Validity of congenital malformation diagnoses in healthcare claims from a university hospital in Japan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study aimed to assess the validity of diagnoses of congenital malformations (CMs) recorded in claims of a university hospital in Japan. METHODS: Congenital malformations were identified according to Code Q00-Q89 of the International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision. All the children who had been diagnosed with CMs based on their claims in 2015 and within 1 year from their birth month were selected for this study. The infants' medical records were considered as a gold standard. Positive predictive values (PPVs) for CMs were calculated. RESULTS: This study included 227 infants who had a CM diagnosis in their claims. Based on the algorithms established by the Quebec Pregnancy Cohort study group, the PPV for any CM was 90.7% and that for major CMs (MCMs) was 91.5%. Concerning MCMs of specific organ systems, those of the circulatory system (PPV 85.1%) were the most frequent, followed by cleft lip and cleft palate (PPV 100.0%), and other CMs of the digestive system (PPV 96.4%). Based on the EUROCAT classification, the PPV for any MCM was 88.5%. Specific MCMs reported in ≥20 infants were ventricular septal defect (PPV 96.0%), patent ductus arteriosus (PPV 72.7%) and cleft lip with or without cleft palate (PPV 100.0%). CONCLUSIONS: The PPVs for CMs in the Japanese administrative data were high enough to suggest that these data could be utilized for perinatal pharmacoepidemiological evaluations. The results were from a single center, and further validation studies are needed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".